I went through BCG's process for a senior product design role last quarter (their internal digital ventures group). The behavioral portion was more layered than I expected for a consulting firm.
First: BCG doesn't frame their behavioral questions the way a typical tech company would. They're not really asking STAR-format questions out loud. The questions sound more like consulting case-style prompts. "Tell me about a time you had to influence a client or stakeholder without direct authority." "Describe a project where the requirements changed significantly midway through. How did you navigate that?"
But they absolutely want a structured answer. The interviewers I spoke with had clearly trained on listening for situation, action, outcome. They just didn't say "use the STAR method."
Themes they came back to more than once: Ambiguity tolerance. BCG's consulting work is inherently ambiguous. They want to know if you freeze or if you make a structured call with imperfect information. Stakeholder influence. Multiple questions touched on getting buy-in from a skeptical audience or a senior person who wasn't on board. Learning from failure. One interviewer asked me directly: "Tell me about a project that failed or significantly underdelivered. What was your role in that?" They pushed back when my first answer was too diplomatic. Intellectual curiosity. This came through indirectly, in follow-up questions about books I'd read or trends I was following. Felt genuine, not a trap.
I asked the interviewer (a principal designer) what trips people up most. She said: people who give generic answers that could apply to any company, and people who can't articulate impact, only activity.
The behavioral round was 45-60 minutes. Probably 4-5 stories you need to have tight. Prep around ambiguity, influence, failure, and something you're deeply curious about technically or intellectually.